Vol. xlii.] 72 



without comparison with a South Russian specimen, to say 

 if they were the same, but there were considerable differ- 

 ences between the measurements of the Chinese eggs and 

 those given of S. chersonesus. This was, however^ some- 

 what discounted by the great variations in size among the 

 Chinese eggs. Of the seven recorded eggs, five were 

 absolutely perfect and two damaged when found ; one 

 in the British Museum was broken in transit, but has been 

 entirely and successfully repaired. 



Mr. W. L. ScLATER communicated the following notes 

 on the nomenclature and taxonymy of African Birds 

 (no. 4) : — 



H^MATOPUS MOQUINI. 



An earlier name for the African Black Oystercatcher is 

 Ilcematopus niger Temminck (Man. d'Orn. 2nd ed. ii. p. 63, 

 1820) ; this name was formerly said to be invalidated by 

 Ilcematopus niger Pallas (Zoogr, Ross. Asiat. ii. p. 131), 

 supposed to have been published in 1811, but as this work 

 was not published till 1827, Temminck's name has priority. 

 A still earlier use of the name is found in Grmelin {Scolopax 

 nigra Gmelin, Syst. Nat. i. pt. 2, p. 659, 1789) for the 

 Black Oystercatcher of the northern Pacific. We must 

 therefore continue to use the old name of the Catalogue 

 for the Black Oystercatcher of South Africa, Ucematojnis 

 moquini Bonaparte, Compt. Rend, xliii. p. 1020 (1856) : 

 Africa. 



It would appear to be more logical to rank the Black 

 Oystercatchers as species rather than as subspecies, as their 

 distribution is so discontinuous. 



Charadrius pecuarius. 



This name for the Kittlitz Sand-Plover is discarded by 

 Hartert (Vog. pal. Faun. p. 1540) for Charadrius varius 

 Vieillot (N. Diet, xxvii. p. 143, 1818), which he states is not 

 preoccupied by Linnasus as asserted by Sbarpe (Cat. Birds, 

 xxiv. p. 297), and should therefore be used. But as has been 



